A new meta-analysis suggests that peritoneal dialysis catheter placement using either laparoscopic or percutaneous techniques produces largely similar clinical outcomes, indicating that both approaches are viable options for patients with end-stage renal disease. This study was published in BMC Nephrology by Xiaoxi W. and colleagues. Although peritoneal dialysis remains a safe and efficient renal replacement therapy for patients with ESRD, the optimal modality of catheter insertion has long been a point of discussion due to the different complication profiles and the various procedural difficulties.
Currently, open surgery remains the most widely used technique in clinical practice; however, minimally invasive approaches-including laparoscopic and percutaneous insertion-have gained increasing adoption. This meta-analysis was registered prospectively on the PROSPERO database (CRD42024509930). An extensive literature search was conducted in EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and CNKI, based on broad international coverage. For statistical analysis, Review Manager, version 5.4.1, was used. All studies comparing laparoscopic and percutaneous PD catheter placements were included, with the focus of analysis resting on the outcomes regarding complications and the perioperative period.
Key Findings
Laparoscopic procedures were associated with a longer operative time compared with percutaneous catheter placement.
No statistically significant difference was observed between the two techniques in terms of length of hospital stay.
There were no significant differences between the laparoscopic and percutaneous insertion in rates of:
This meta-analysis showed that the clinical outcomes for both the laparoscopic and percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion techniques were equivalent, though differing in some respects regarding operative time and risk of bleeding. While laparoscopic insertion may reduce postoperative bleeding, neither approach had the edge in complications or duration of hospital stay. Larger multicenter randomized studies are yet needed to establish these findings and further delineate clinical guidelines.
Reference:
Wang, X., Jin, W., Li, X. et al. Percutaneous versus laparoscopic catheter placement for peritoneal dialysis: a meta-analysis. BMC Nephrol 26, 687 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-025-04597-z
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.